« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Union Posters & Posers: Non-Union* @MMFA likes the NLRB’s ‘Skirting Congress’

On Thursday, when Obama’s union appointees at the job-destroying National Labor Relations Board issued their latest edict that America’s employers must post notices advising employees about their rights to unionize, apparently the post wherein the NLRB’s “skirting Congress was referenced bothered the non-unionized* staff at Media Matters.

Interestingly, MMFers didn’t seem to take issue with the fact that the NLRB is destroying jobs and hurting the economy.

No, the Marxists at Media Matters only seem to have a problem with the assertion that the NLRB has skirted Congress in issuing its new mandate as they wrote a post entitled Red State Falsely Claims NLRB Lacks Authority To Issue Rule On Labor Notification.

Since whether or not the NLRB skirted Congress by forcing employers to post notices will ultimately be decided by the Courts (unless sanity returns to the NLRB in 2013 and the rule is rescinded), rather than belabor the point, here is the justification [emphasis added for the dullards at non-union* MMFA] for stating that the union sycophants at the National Labor Relations Board skirted Congress:

First and foremost, there is the lone GOP member of the NLRB, Brian Hayes, who has argued from at the beginning that “the posting requirement is beyond the scope of the Board’s NLRA Sec. 6 power to issue ‘such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the provisions’ of the NLRA.”

Of course, far be it for the non-attorneys at MMFA to disagree with the lawyers (including a former NLRB member) who argued for the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace when they wrote:

The Board is without statutory authority to require up to six million private-sector businesses, regardless of whether they have committed an unfair labor practice, to post a workplace notice detailing employees’ rights under the NLRA. The Board cites Section 6 of the NLRA as authority for the proposed rules, but Section 6 only authorizes the Board to promulgate “rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act.” 29 U.S.C. § 156 (emphasis added). Of course, the Board’s authority to administer the Act begins only when a representation petition or unfair labor practice charge is filed.

Section 6 says nothing about asserting jurisdiction against an employer in the absence of a representation petition or unfair labor practice charge.

And, of course there’s this from the American Action Forum:

Section 6 of the NLRA Does Not Authorize This Action:

The Board’s only justification for the new posting requirement is found in Section 6 of the NLRA, “The Board shall have authority from time to time to make, amend, and rescind, in the manner prescribed by the Administrative Procedure Act [5 U.S.C. 553], such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act.” We believe this broad grant of authority does not permit the Board to force employers to post union organization rights. (It is not too surprising that Section 6 is the same supposed grant of authority that Professor DeChiara cited in 1995.)

However, citing Section 6 does not necessarily grant the NLRB with the power to issue this regulation. The U.S. Supreme Court has circumscribed NLRB rulemaking excess in the past: “The deference owed to an expert tribunal cannot be allowed to slip into a judicial inertia which results in the unauthorized assumption by an agency of major policy decisions properly made by Congress.”

Now, there are several other sources (including the NFIB statement in the original post) that could certainly be explained for the kids at MMFA. However, since MMFA is a union-funded organization (from the likes of AFSCME, the NEA, SEIU and AFL-CIO), it is not at all surprising that they would try to defend the union appointees at the National Labor Relations Board.

What is fascinating, though, is that MMFA does not seem to be living up to its own standards.

In fact, by all accounts so far, MMFA’s own union zealotry is yet another case of left-wing hypocrisy, since MMFA does not appear to be a unionized employer. On the whole union issue, by all appearances, MMFA seems to be running on the standard double standard that the Left is so infamous for.

*With that in mind, here is a standing offer for those of you non-union staffers at the MMFA:

You are hereby offered the opportunity to unionize Media Matters at no charge to you.

In fact, some former union organizers and agents will gladly help you unionize for free.

Moreover, since Media Matters management seems to like the hallucinogenically-named Employee Free Choice Act (aka “card check”), we can assume that MMFA managment would let us unionize you without a secret-ballot election even being necessary.

Heck, since MMFA is hiring, it’s even possible we can get someone on the inside of MMFA to unionize you from within (you know, like a union salt).

In fact, MMFers, we’ll not just even help you unionize for free, we’ll help you (also for free) negotiate for a contract that will guarantee you better wages and working conditions at your place of employment at Media Matters.

If Media Matters management plays hardball with your union, we’ll help you file charges at the NLRB for free.

If worse comes to worse, and Media Matters management starts “union-busting” like some of its liberal donors sometimes do (see Penny Pritzker), we’ll even help you go out on strike for as long as you’d like to strike. Heck, we’ll even help you protest outside Media Matters management’s homes (like this).

If Media Matters management replaces you, well, we’ll even let you write about it at LaborUnionReport.com (for free), which we’ll cross post everywhere as well.

Now, for all you union posers at Media Matters, it’s time for you to put up or STFU. Let’s get MMFA workers a VOICE at work!

Really, since it does not appear that you’ve taken advantage of your collective bargaining rights in your jobs at Media Matters, don’t you think it’s time you do so and live within your own screed?

*Note: If, in fact you are not a bunch of [how do you say it?] “non-union rats” working without a contract at MMFA, please feel free to post your CBA in the comments on the cross-post here. [You don't need to worry about leaving your name.]

If you want to take a bunch of “seasoned” former union agents up on the offer and unionize Media Matters with free help (kids, we won’t even charge you union dues!), you can leave a comment on the cross-post as well.

So, what do you say, MMFers, let’s unionize Media Matters and show them who’s boss, shall we?

________________

“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776

Cross-posted on LaborUnionReport.com

Get Alerts